On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:23:16 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
>> From the bug description:
>> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
>> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>>
>> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been
>> set to null, so effect
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:23:16 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
>> From the bug description:
>> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
>> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>>
>> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been
>> set to null, so effect
On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 00:59:25 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> From the bug description:
>> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
>> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>>
>> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been
>> set to null, so effectivel
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:23:16 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
>> From the bug description:
>> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
>> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>>
>> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been
>> set to null, so effect
> From the bug description:
> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>
> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been set
> to null, so effectively does nothing. It should occur before obj = null;
>
> For R
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 19:57:41 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
> From the bug description:
> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>
> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been set
> to null, so effectively d
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:25:15 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> @dholmes-ora Is this really possible? The `obj` ref is passed to the
>> PhantomReference constructor, which stores it in a field, the constructed
>> PhantomReference is returned, and it's then used in a reachabilityFence call
>> below. So
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 19:57:41 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
> From the bug description:
> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>
> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been set
> to null, so effectively d
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 14:40:12 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/ForceGC.java line 102:
>>
>>> 100: }
>>> 101: }
>>> 102: Reference.reachabilityFence(ref);
>>
>> I think everything from the creation of ref to the line above needs to
>> enclosed in
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:25:15 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> @dholmes-ora Is this really possible? The `obj` ref is passed to the
>> PhantomReference constructor, which stores it in a field, the constructed
>> PhantomReference is returned, and it's then used in a reachabilityFence call
>> below. So
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:12:02 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> The reason for the explicit reference and RF, as I recall, is to guard
>> against the allocation of the new object being elided entirely, with the
>> `PhantomReference` constructor being passed null (or itself being elided)
>> and no refe
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 05:01:26 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/ForceGC.java line 82:
>>
>>> 80: PhantomReference ref = new PhantomReference<>(obj,
>>> queue);
>>> 81: Reference.reachabilityFence(obj);
>>> 82: obj = null;
>>
>> You're right to questio
On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 00:40:24 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> From the bug description:
>> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
>> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>>
>> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been
>> set to null, so effectivel
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 05:01:26 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/ForceGC.java line 82:
>>
>>> 80: PhantomReference ref = new PhantomReference<>(obj,
>>> queue);
>>> 81: Reference.reachabilityFence(obj);
>>> 82: obj = null;
>>
>> You're right to questio
On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 00:39:16 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> From the bug description:
>> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
>> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>>
>> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been
>> set to null, so effectivel
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 19:57:41 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
> From the bug description:
> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>
> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been set
> to null, so effectively d
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 19:57:41 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
> From the bug description:
> ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls
> for 'obj' and 'ref'.
>
> Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been set
> to null, so effectively d
>From the bug description:
ForceGC would be improved by moving the Reference.reachabilityFence() calls for
'obj' and 'ref'.
Reference.reachabilityFence(obj) is currently placed after 'obj' has been set
to null, so effectively does nothing. It should occur before obj = null;
For Reference.reacha
18 matches
Mail list logo
